So this may be a dead horse for some of you, but I find regular confusion in USMB posts on the term "corporatism". This entry from the Encyclopedia Britannica seems to be representative of most definitions I'm finding on online:

Corporatism, Italian corporativismo, also called corporativism, the theory and practice of organizing society into &#8220;corporations&#8221; subordinate to the state. According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction. However, as the &#8220;corporate state&#8221; was put into effect in fascist Italy between World Wars I and II, it reflected the will of the country&#8217;s dictator, Benito Mussolini, rather than the adjusted interests of economic groups.

Click to expand...

The main point here is that corporatism has virtually nothing to say about the debate between socialism and capitalism, or any of the other issues that dominate our typical left/right pissing matches.

The most common mistake I've been seeing is the use of 'corporatism' as though it applies specifically in incorporated business. That's a natural mistake, giving the similar terminology involved, as we usually refer to these businesses as "corporations", but it's important to recognize that the 'corporation' used to define corporatism is different.

Also, corporatism is not, as many seem to assume, dominance of government by incorporate businesses - though such a thing can occur under corporatism.

In my view, the most important feature of corporatism is that it is fundamentally about group rights and opposed to individual rights. It governs society by delegating power and privilege to groups organized around common interests, preferring negotiation and quid-pro-quo to rule of law and egalitarian rights. In short, your rights depend primarily on which 'corporation' you belong to.

Corporatism strikes me as decidedly un-American, and the current trend by prominent leaders in both parties (e.g. Romney and Obama) to embrace it, disturbing.

So this may be a dead horse for some of you, but I find regular confusion in USMB posts on the term "corporatism". This entry from the Encyclopedia Britannica seems to be representative of most definitions I'm finding on online:

Corporatism, Italian corporativismo, also called corporativism, the theory and practice of organizing society into corporations subordinate to the state. According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction. However, as the corporate state was put into effect in fascist Italy between World Wars I and II, it reflected the will of the countrys dictator, Benito Mussolini, rather than the adjusted interests of economic groups.

Click to expand...

The main point here is that corporatism has virtually nothing to say about the debate between socialism and capitalism, or any of the other issues that dominate our typical left/right pissing matches.

The most common mistake I've been seeing is the use of 'corporatism' as though it applies specifically in incorporated business. That's a natural mistake, giving the similar terminology involved, as we usually refer to these businesses as "corporations", but it's important to recognize that the 'corporation' used to define corporatism is different.

Also, corporatism is not, as many seem to assume, dominance of government by incorporate businesses - though such a thing can occur under corporatism.

In my view, the most important feature of corporatism is that it is fundamentally about group rights and opposed to individual rights. It governs society by delegating power and privilege to groups organized around common interests, preferring negotiation and quid-pro-quo to rule of law and egalitarian rights. In short, your rights depend primarily on which 'corporation' you belong to.

Corporatism strikes me as decidedly un-American, and the current trend by prominent leaders in both parties (e.g. Romney and Obama) to embrace it, disturbing.

Click to expand...

Not just dominance of government, but politics and rights.

It's always abused over and over. to the point where they bribe congress into passing illegal laws, do backhouse deals with the government if they cant get their way, bribe their ways to unfair and illegal taxbreaks, and promote politicians who work for them.

I think corporatism the natural result of the way we finance elections. Without public financing it makes sense to form "corporations", subordinate to the state or not, to increase ones influence. The problem comes when politicians make expensive promises to those "corporations" to get monetary backing for their campaigns.

It's always abused over and over. to the point where they bribe congress into passing illegal laws, do backhouse deals with the government if they cant get their way, bribe their ways to unfair and illegal taxbreaks, and promote politicians who work for them.

Click to expand...

Uh... you seem to be missing the point. Corporatism has nothing to do with businesses influencing government.

It is about the collusion between private business and government bureaucracy to oppress a people, spawned most often from the government. The closest we saw in this nation for the reverse being true was in the late 1800's with the rise of the trusts and monopolies that bought the protection of political machines like Tammany Hall.

Of course in the early 1900's before the progressive era began even, much of this was thwarted by the Sherman Anti-Trust Act which spawned a slough of legislation that CORRECTLY prevented this kind of collusion helping stop it.

Today, the reverse has been happening and government is the force corrupting business into collusion through protective laws and subsidies in exchange for votes and control.

Uh... you seem to be missing the point. Corporatism has nothing to do with businesses influencing government.

Click to expand...

HUH?

"Corporatism is a system where businesses are nominally in private hands, but are in fact controlled by the government. In a corporatist state, government officials often act in collusion with their favored business interests to design polices that give those interests a monopoly position, to the detriment of both competitors and consumers."

So what term does describe the system we have now where the money that our politicians get from corporations and lobbyists carry more weight than the votes of the American people?

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it's become a typical corrupt republic like so many around the globe on the verge of going corporatist if something isn't done quick to stop people voting themselves goodies from the public piggy bank, and tyrannical politicians using this as a way to personal enrichment and power.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!